Col. Edward King

6 Annotations

First Reading

Terry Foreman  •  Link

Col. Edward King, Commissioner for paying off the armed forces, 1660-1.

L&M Companion

Third Reading

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

Edward King’s grandfather, a Londoner of Suffolk origin, bought a home in Ashby de la Launde, Lincolnshire, in 1580.
His father avoided commitment in the Civil Wars, but Edward King (1606-1681) fought for the Parliamentary side.
He took part in the first attack on Newark, and was indicted for treason at the Lincolnshire assizes in 1643.
Although a rigid Presbyterian, Col. King quarrelled with Lord Willoughby of Parham, and was regarded with suspicion by Oliver Cromwell, so in 1645 his commissions were cancelled at the request of the county committee.

Later in 1645 Col. Edward King stood unsuccessfully for Grimsby against Sir William Wray, and he became recorder of the borough in succession to a Royalist.

In 1647, Col. King was in trouble for obstructing the collection of taxes; he held no further county office until the eve of the Restoration, and in 1659 Gervase Holles MP included him among the Lincolnshire Royalists.

Col. Edward King was returned for Grimsby on his corporation interest at the general election of 1660, and became one of the most active Members of the Convention Parliament, with special interest in the indemnity proceedings, the religious settlement, and the disbandment of the army. He was named to 83 committees, in 8 of which he took the chair, acted as teller in 24 divisions, and made 45 recorded speeches.
‘Factious and fanatical enough’, he was marked by Lord Wharton as a friend, but won over to the Court a few days before the opening of Parliament by a leading London Royalist, who was soon able to report with satisfaction that ‘none act more vigorously for the King in the House than Prynne and King’, who were ‘resolved to drive on as fast as possible’.

On 26 Apr. 1660, Col. Edward King MP proposed, in barely veiled language, that they should render unto Caesar the things that were Caesar’s, ‘which was acclaimed as a good motion’, although not by George Monck, who told King that ‘he could not promise to keep the people quiet if such motions were made’.
On Mordaunt’s advice, Col. King moved on the following day ‘the stopping all private business till the public was settled, and to adjourn for a day or two’. He was seconded by Heneage Finch MP, anxious to secure time for the Declaration of Breda to arrive before the elections committee could question the return of Cavaliers and their sons, contrary to the Long Parliament ordinance.

On 15 May, Col. Edward King MP was named to the committees to examine John Thurloe, and to consider the indemnity bill.
As chairman of the committee to prepare measures against recusants he reported a proclamation against Jesuits and seminary priests and carried it to the Lords on 29 May.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

PART 2

After the Restoration, Col. King MP was among those ordered to draft clauses of exception to the indemnity bill and to administer the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to his fellow-Members.
On 8 June, 1660, he was appointed to the committees to prepare a proviso about those regicides who had obeyed the proclamation to give themselves up and to establish the names of those who had sat in judgment on King Charles without signing the death sentence.
He was teller against allowing a full pardon to William Lenthall and Sir William Roberts, and for the soldiers William Sydenham, William Boteler and Richard Creed.
He favoured excepting all members of the high court of justice, and spoke against reading a petition from Oliver St.John
He favoured referring the petition from the intruded dons at Oxford and the unauthorized issue of Anglican publications to special committees, on both of which he served.
As chairman of the committee for the impropriate rectories surrendered by Royalists as part of their compositions, he desired to prevent their immediate return, and was empowered to take over their management from the trustees for the maintenance of ministers
He was named to the committees to consider the surest and speediest way to satisfy Gen. Monck’s claim on the revenue, and to recommend an establishment for Dunkirk.

Col. Edward King MP opposed requiring the beneficiaries of the indemnity bill to go through the expensive process of suing out a pardon under the great seal, but he supported a wide measure of political disablement: ‘’Twas not prudence to set up those in power that now lie under our feet, nor that any in the House that are guilty of such crimes should plead their own causes’.
His speeches are not normally remarkable for colourful expressions, but on the proposal to compel Protectorate officials to refund their salaries he observed succinctly that ‘’twas fit such sponges should be squeezed’, and he acted as teller for the proviso
He was among those ordered to prepare reasons for a conference on 3 orders issued by the Upper House and to consider two provisos to the indemnity bill on 7 July.
Four days later he reported that John Hutchinson MP should be compelled to refund the rewards granted to him by the Long Parliament at the expense of the Newark Royalists, and the proviso was added to the bill.
He urged that religious doctrine and ecclesiastical discipline should be discussed separately, saying that ‘no man could tell what the discipline according to law was’, and he supported Prynne’s motion that the grand committee on religion should not meet again until further orders.
On 21 July he introduced a petition from divers ministers in sequestrated livings, for which he obtained a reading only by a narrow majority.

His speech of 27 July suggests that his honeymoon with Charles II was nearing its end: ‘though he could not but admire his Majesty’s goodness, yet he desired to hasten the bill of indemnity’.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

PART 3

After urging the House ‘to remove all scandalous ministers, but not to press the 39 Articles’, Col. Edward King MP took the chair in the committee for settling ecclesiastical livings. There appears to have been a small Anglican majority on this committee, but by adroit use of his powers he was able to ensure that only constant refusal of the sacraments should be deemed a disqualification.

On 4 Aug. 1660, Col. Edward King reported a bill to set up a disbandment commission.

He was teller against the Lords’ amendment to the disablement clause of the indemnity bill, and helped to manage a conference; but when it was objected that the Commons were obliged in honour to defend the lives of those regicides who had come in on the proclamation, he declared unanswerably that ‘God had infatuated them to bring them to justice’.

On 16 Aug. he carried an order to the Lords appointing a new treasurer for the maimed soldiers in Ely House and the Savoy.
But for most of the month his prime concern was the ecclesiastical livings bill; he reported it on 14 Aug., and after long debate warded off a renewed Anglican attempt on the floor of the House to prevent denial of the sacrament to those who were not scandalous or ignorant.
He brought in a bill for a temporary restraint on ecclesiastical leases, and opposed an inquiry into presentations to crown livings.
On the last day of August the main bill was ordered to be engrossed, and Col. Edward King MP was among those entrusted with directing the clerk of the Commons over any difficulties that might arise in the process, and with managing a conference.

On 6 Sept. 1660, Col. King obtained an order from the House empowering the disbandment commissioners to obtain assistance from the civil authorities, and was nominated to the commission. He was among those ordered to amend the instructions so that the garrisons should be disbanded last, and helped to manage a conference.

During the recess Wharton sent Col. King a copy of the case for modified episcopacy, with objections and answers, but he took no part in the debate.

On most other matters in the second session, Col. King acted with the Opposition.
He moved for an inquiry into the present state of the revenue before any additional supply, and on 3 Dec. he was ordered with Nicholas Pedley and John Glyn to take care of an inquiry into obstructions in levying the poll-tax. If London obtained an Act to impose a rate for expenditure on Charles II’s reception, he argued, ‘they must do the same favour to every city and county that desired it’, and he acted as teller against the bill.

He complained of the arbitrary power of the lords lieutenant, and seconded Andrew Marvell MP in denouncing the fees of £150 extorted from John Milton by the serjeant-at-arms.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

CONCLUSION:

On 18 Dec. 1660, Col. King MP objected that the report by John Birch MP on the debts of the army and navy had not been authorized by the committee.
Although generally unsympathetic to royalist claims for compensation, he obtained an order for the sister of Sir Edward Seymour to recover £3,571 sequestrated from the customs farmers in 1644.

Together with William Prynne MP and John Barton MP, Col. King was ordered to bring in a bill to recover £10,000 for charitable purposes from the prize commissioners and maintenance trustees.

He was teller against a proviso to the college leases bill precluding fellows and scholars from claiming restoration to their places.
He considered that compensation for officials of the court of wards should be left entirely to the King, and was named to the committee to consider the Lords’ amendments to the bill.
He was among those ordered to prepare reasons on the bill for confirming marriages.
Assisted by Prynne and Birch, he prepared a bill to recover arrears of excise, and steered it successfully through committee. But this did not prevent him from again taking issue with Birch over his proposal for a general excise on all foreign commodities, which, he again claimed, had not been approved by the committee.

Although resigned to the celebration of Christmas, Col. King MP seconded the unsuccessful motion of Robert Shapcote for a session on [what we call] Boxing Day.

Col. Edward King MP did not stand for re-election in 1661, and was described as ‘a great abettor of sectaries and nonconformists’.

Col. Edward King's arrest by the deputy lieutenants during the 1665 second Anglo-Dutch war was, he asserted, merely an act of personal revenge on the part of Sir Robert Carr.
He was released after 3 months, but in February 1666 he was committed to the Tower for refusing to give security to the deputy lieutenants for his peaceable demeanour, "by entering into a bond for £2,000 ... to appear where he should be directed by the lord lieutenant or any two deputy lieutenants after 20 hours notice in writing left at his house, to discover all plots, conspiracies etc. and to abstain from all conventicles and seditious meetings."
Col. King claimed such conditions were ‘illegal, infamous and servile’.
He bribed his way out of prison, but was defeated by Sir Henry Belasyse in a by-election in 1667, after which Col. King may have moved to London, where 2 of his daughters were living.

In 1670 Col. Edward King was described as appearing ‘daily upon the Exchange, not merely to promote sedition but rebellion and treason also’ in his zeal against the renewal of the Conventicles Act.

When a licence was granted for a Presbyterian meeting at Col. Edward King's house in Ashby in 1672, it was reported that "for many years he has endeavoured to protect those questioned for non-conformity ... in the ecclesiastical court at Lincoln, where at common law he has counselled or set on above 90 actions."

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.

References

Chart showing the number of references in each month of the diary’s entries.

1661